About your Search

20121101
20121130
SHOW
Today 14
( more )
STATION
FOXNEWS 77
MSNBCW 58
CNNW 49
MSNBC 48
CNN 43
KPIX (CBS) 22
WRC (NBC) 20
WUSA (CBS) 18
KNTV (NBC) 14
WBAL (NBC) 13
FBC 12
WTTG 12
CSPAN 8
KGO (ABC) 8
WETA 8
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 548
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 548 (some duplicates have been removed)
hearing. >> the unfair attacks on the ambassador susan rice are simply wrong. she had to rely on intelligence provided. i sat here while colin powell provided the intelligence he had regarding weapons of mass destruction in iraq. >> reporter: fox news was told behind closed doors there were heated exchanges in the classified session over the so-called benghazi talking points used by the administration and ambassador susan rice for the sunday talk show september 16. fox news told neither the director of international intelligence nor the acting director of the c.i.a. knew who finalized the talking points and they could not explain why it minimized the role of al-qaeda when there is evidence of the terrorist group's involvement. morrell was pushed to explain why petraeus told lawmakers it was a flash mob prompted by the anti-islam video. morrell said he wasn't at petraeus' briefing and had nothing further to add. republicans questions drove the state department to deny request for security after ambassador chrissteins and his team or consulate could not defend against a coordina
. >> the president responds to questions about susan rice -- >> about the benghazi attacks. >> senator mccain and senator graham want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> former cia director david petraeus will testify before the senate intelligence committee. >> general petraeus had an affair with his biographer. people are snapping up copies of the book. >> it's so pathetic. >> the book is available in hard cover and extremely hard cover. >>> today on an i'm sorry i lost conference call with top campaign don't oorors, mitt rom said the president won the election because he game african-american and latino voters, quote, gifts. abc news has this audio. >> what the president's campaign did was focus on certain members of his base coalition, give them extraordinary financial gifts from the government and then work very aggressively to turn them out to vote. >> romney also said that the president's campaign focused on giving targeted groups a big gift so he made a big effort on small things. those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars. he said the president f
parts of the community? >> but does this, would this give-- what does it mean for, say, susan rice and the administration then? is this, does this help them politically by shielding them or does petraeus here saying i thought it was a terrorist attack, does that mean this puts, for example, susan rice's statements more up to scrutiny? >> well, i think answers the fundamental question, did they deliberately mislead on this case for political reasons because they were driving the narrative that al-qaeda had been decimated and the war, war was receding or a question of incompetence. neither of those two things is good for the administration although it's after the election, so, they can get the consequences. >> let's take a look at the president talking about susan rice, the u.n. ambassador who many think he will nominate to succeed hillary clinton as secretary of state. >> for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> paul:
about susan rice. she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i've said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous. and you know, we're after an election now. i think it is important for us to find out exactly what happened in benghazi, and i'm happy to cooperate in any ways that congress wants. we have provided every bit of information that we have and we will continue to provide information and we've got a full-blown investigation. and all that information will be disgorged to congress. and i don't
've been told the cia had been telling susan rice? >> i think the real problem for general petraeus in this story is that it not only does not mesh with what the white house was saying, it doesn't mesh with what we're told general petraeus said in the immediate aftermath, where he is said to have talked about a spontaneous flash mob. >> to members of congress. >> to members of congress behind closed doors as well and this is the problem. it's not only that we know that that's not true now, it's that at the time there were a lot of other indications that indicate that was not true, denied by the libyan prime minister, the cia station chief called it an act of terror. we had the fbi and i believe the national center for counterterrorism also giving briefings. >> paul: that's right. >> saying this. why was general petraeus's testimony then so at odds with other parts of the community? >> but does this, would this give-- what does it mean for, say, susan rice and the administration then? is this, does this help them politically by shielding them or does petraeus here saying i thought it
lindsey graham giving his view of ambassador susan rice and her role in the administration spin on the benghazi terror attacks and the president's reactions to those statements at his first news conference since being reelected. mr. obama, defending ms. rice, but his defense has actually added more to the controversy. senator graham reacted to the president by saying, mr. president, don't think for one minute i don't hold you responsible for benghazi, i think you failed as commander-in-chief before, during and after the attack. so much to get to first on this, jim, the showdown between the two senators, graham and mccain and the president. abc's terry moran called it an obama smackdown. "the washington post" john mccain's benghazi, and some say it's about mccain being bitter about losing to obama four years ago. >> i think five names and a conflagration, and number one petraeus and broadwell and number two, benghazi, benghazi, petraeus, broadwell, military ethics, mccain obama reduction, and fifth, the susan rice story, which life imitates art. if you go back and watch the movie
. >> the american people deserve to know the facts. we cannot ever let this happen again. >> why would susan rice not get our vote? i don't trust her. >> defending susan rice. >> if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. >> there are no barriers to sitting down and beginning to work through this process. >> as the fiscal cliff loans, is there a deal in the works? mitt romney explains why he lost. >> the president's campaign focused on certain members of his base coalition, give them extraordinary financial gifts from the government, and worked very aggressively to turn them out to vote. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> well, i just don't know where to begin this week. do we talk about republican charges of a cover-up with regard to the attack in benghazi? do we talk about sexual liaisons and e-mails? to talk about israel and gaza, the possibility of the fiscal cliff? let's start with the sex. [laughter] cia director resigns after the fbi uncovers e-mails showing that general david petraeus had an extrama
, wouldn't tell anyone who instructed susan rice to go with the video story. the way it went down, she was told to go out there to talk to five talk shows and there were talking points. who prepared the talking points and told them to go with the talking point? neither one of them would come clean on. >> dana: they have plausible deniability. they said we don't know who did it. that feels convenient. >> bob: president said the white house asked her to do it. >> dana: who prepared the information, that is the question. >> bob: the question is who gave her the talking points? and we know talking points she was given to her mind, given the same intelligence committees of the hill, >> dana: they could not talk about the role of ansar al-sharia when there is strong evidence of the involvement. if the chairwoman was getting advice about the question to ask, the question you have been asking since september 11. >> greg: incredible. do you think hillary got herself far enough away from this thing? she is in australia. feed her wine and we might get more facts from her slightly tipsy than anybo
our power as far as susan rice is concerned. >> i don't trust her. and the reason i don't trust her is because i think she knew better, and if she didn't know better, she shouldn't be the voice of america. >> key republican senators are trying to block susan race from becoming secretary of state. ms. rice is currently the permanent representative to the united nations for the u.s. she has not yet been officially nominated for the state department job to replace hillary clinton who intends to resign probably. rice is rumored to be underactive and positive consideration. but republicans and some democrats have been angry with ms. rice for saying that the attack in benghazi that left four americans dead was spontaneous and not preplanned. >> what our assessment is as of the present is, in fact, it began spontaneously in benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy, sparked by this hateful video. we do not have information at present that leads to us conclude that this was prem
. and that if you nominate susan rice for secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination. as senator graham said, he simply doesn't trust ambassador rice after what she said about benghazi. i would like your reaction to that and would those threats deter from making a nomination like that? >> first of all, i'm not going to comment at this point on various nominations that i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the succeecond term. those are things that are still being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice. she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i've said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothin
the politicization of a public statement that was put out by the entire intelligence committee, which susan rice on the 16th, who was asked to go before the people and use that statement, did. i have read every one of the five interviews she did that day. she was within the context of that statement. and for this, she has been pillaried for two months. i don't understand it. it has to stop. if it continues, it's going to set up once again a partisan divide in these -- the house and the senate, which congressman rogers and i have tried to overcome and have overcome with some success with respect to the intelligence committees. >> congressman rogers, to my understanding, talking to government officials, is that what susan rice said on "meet the press" five days after the attack and other programs as well, was very similar to what then director petraeus said privately on september 14, that there appeared to be a terrorist element to it but that it appeared first to be spontaneous but it became a terrorist attack, and that that was his belief. so were they not speaking basically in the same way? >>
.n. ambassador susan rice. top intelligence officials say they knew from the beginning that terrorism was involved in the attacks but kept rice's comments vague to avoid compromising future legal proceedings. they knew terrorism was involved but didn't know whether the attacks were planned in advance and they didn't have the suspect's identity. still, many house repub cans are saying he's unfit to succeed secretary clinton at the state department. >> i'm just curious. john heilman, first of all -- >> elizabeth warren. >> let's just say what happened, okay? the president's punch line was al qaeda is on the run, blah, blah, blah. they politicized intel. guess what, white houses do that. i'm not shocked, i'm not stunned. i wish they wouldn't have done it. but how do you protect americans in the future and what happened after the ambassador was already killed? but how long has susan rice been in public service, like since her 20s, right? >> a long time. >> so we actually have people on capitol hill that are going to disqualify her based on one "meet the press" performance? i mean if you w
big breaking news. susan rice has another meeting scheduled to start right about now on capitol hill. this team she's meeting with connecticut senator joseph lieberman. earlier rice and aktding cia director mike morrell met with john mccain, lindsey graham and kelly ayotte over what rice knew the in the days after the deadly consulate attack in benghazi. all three claim to be more troubled after this meeting. >> we're significantly troubled by many of the answers that we got and some that we didn't get. >> bottom line, i'm more disturbed now than i was before that the 16th september explanation about how four americans died by ambassador rice, i think, does not do justice to the reality at the time. >> clearly the impression that was begin, the information begin to the american people was wrong. in fact, ambassador rice said today, absolutely, it was wrong. >> and within the past hour the white house once again defended ambassador rice. >> focus on some might say obsession made on comments made on sunday shows seems, to me, and to many, to be misplaced. >> and the ambassador her
. >>> the bizarre and absurd attack on susan rice after this. twins. i didn't see them coming. i have obligations. cute obligations, but obligations. i need to rethink the core of my portfolio. what i really need is sleep. introducing the ishares core, building blocks for the heart of your portfolio. find out why 9 out of 10 large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. risk includes possible loss of principal. why use temporary treatments when you can prevent the acid that's causing it with prevacid24hr. with one pill prevacid24hr works at the source to prevent the acid that causes frequent heartburn all day and all night. and with new prevacid24hr perks, you can earn rewards from dinner deals to music downloads for purchasing prevacid24hr. prevent acid all day and all night for 24 hours with prevacid24hr. >>> if you asked me a couple months ago to guess the obama administrative official the republicans would t
in the same way that john mccain is about foreign policy. if you look at those, susan rice, this is a personal vendetta-- >> you think mccain and lindsey-- >> mccain had his own daughter attacked, accused of having an illegitimate child when in fact adopted a young girl from south asia, you're saying that mccain is being driven by racial prejudice here? >> there's no other way to look at this. >> jon: another week and another twist in the media coverage of the benghazi terror attacks and the aftermath and ambassadors susan rice and reworked talking points about the deadly event. you kind of got a sense testify there, jim. there's a suggestion that any criticism directed toward the obama administration is either racist or sexist. is that the new media mean? >> and rich wilson has no other way to look at it. that settles that. look, it's clear that for time magazine they said it's ace politics for the democrats, if the obama administration nominates here and see her support there and the tact that they'll take at sort of a mass political level. at the elite level. i think the administration is d
.s. consulate in benghazi and said if you nominate susan rice to be secretary of state, they will do everything in their power to block her nomination as senator graham said, he simply doesn't trust ambassador rice after what she said about benghazi. i would like your reaction to that and would those threats deter you from making a nomination like that? >> well, first of all, i'm not going to comment at this point on various nominations i'll put forward to fill out my cabinet for the second term. those are things that are still being discussed. but let me say specifically about susan rice, she has done exemplary work. she has represented the united states and our interests in the united nations with skill and professionalism and toughness and grace. as i said before, she made an appearance at the request of the white house in which she gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her. if senator mccain and senator graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. a
back to the president's press conference taking a pretty tough decisive tone on susan rice. and then you look at what's happening -- and also his position on the tax increases. take all of that together, it looks like more of the same. do you think -- do you sense, from your reporting, are we just having people circle each other or are their feet in stone? >> i think there's still some areas where people can move and get to the right place. but, you know, the two things i just keep thinking about is i think the business community, i think, what steve says is exactly right. seems like from the outside what they want more than anything is certain certainty. just moment to moment and minute to minute, it's crisis to crisis. that's an atmosphere not conducive toward optimal economic activity. this notion of trying to get to long-term, as you said, to long-term stability but not having short-term austerity measures that would be too depressed on consumer activity seems like where we need to end up. i think there's going to be a lot of pressure on the business community on republ
, and ambassador susan rice come over a two-week period. catherine herridge learned today that neither the director of national intelligence, nor the acting cia director, was responsible for repairing preparing a report that partially blamed the benghazi attack on amateurish youtube anti-islam video. they claim the president obama pressed upon the american people and upon the united nations general assembly. he was push hard to explain what caused them to push the youtube video three days after that attack. the chief said simply he was not at the betray -- petraeus briefing and had nothing to say. there was demonstrable and incurable evidence of their involvement and no evidence of anything other than a terrorist attack. and the administration continued to press its false tale, despite fox news reporting and they reported within 24 hours, u.s. intelligence agencies monomania that the attack was an act of terrorism with ties to al qaeda, but had also identified and located one of the leaders of the attack. despite warnings hours before, state department e-mails reviewed two hours into the attack tha
of the terror attack to "go after me," not u.n. ambassador susan rice. this is "special report." ♪ >> chris: good evening. i'm chris wallace in for bret president obama held his first news conference in eight months today. and the first question was not about the fiscal cliff, or the terror attack in libya. no. it was about the scandal involving two top officials, two women who are not their wives an whether there was a breach of national security. we have fox team coverage. national security correspondent jennifer griffin looks at whether the mistress of the former c.i.a. director had classified information on her home computer. chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge tells us how some republican lawmakers are invoking washington's most famous scandal ever. but we begin with chief white house correspondent ed henry on the libya attack and who should get the blame. good evening. >> good evening, chris. temperature was raised today as the republicans said they want watergate style hearings in to benghazi. the president fired back saying if you want to blame someone, blame me, not
the other way. john boldin, not susan rice, would be the hot talk for secretary of state. war clouds would be overhead and the bugles blaring would be marching to iran. just think self-deportation would be the name of the game for immigration. voter suppression would be the toast of the town, or certain parts of town. the extinction of health care would be hr-1, up there on the front burner for congressional action. just think, if the election had gone the other way the rich would be basking in the best tax protection known to man, a real-life, genuine mandate to leave them and their money alone. but a funny thing happened on the way to the white house. people voted for tax fairness. they voted to make the rich pay their share, specifically voted that way for one thing because the republicans kept warning them not to. and so it came to pass today that president obama said just that at his press conference. give the middle class their tax cuts, speaker boehner. cut it loose so they can go christmas shopping, senator mcconnell. it's what the people voted for. that's why they voted for me. th
, therefore, not in the much talked about talking points that susan rice and others refer to publicly where there was a lot more focus on the potential for a spontaneous demonstration, the video, that kind of thing. that the piece of this puzzle that was more clearly known by the intelligence community of the involvement of terror groups was classified. in part that could be argued as a protection required in order to try to pursue them, that kind of thing. that is new information today, and it helps to show us how there might have been two tracks happening all along. the public statements that were reflecting part of what they may have known. the real question is, if they knew it was terrorism all along, was there too much suggestion that a video or demonstrations may have been involved? that's what people see very differently often based on their political point of view. >> yes, and it is based on political point of view. the fact of the matter, the information that susan rice was provided and what she indicated on "meet the press" and other programs, that would have been a part of the de
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 548 (some duplicates have been removed)